-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.6k
rpc: Expose block height of wallet transactions #17437
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
I can add a release note to list affected RPC. I think I'm also going to add tests for each affected RPC. |
|
Misssing update of the help doc |
|
Concept ACK |
3018a7f to
36d9042
Compare
|
Added release note, tests and updated help doc. |
|
ACK 36d904246aa574f65ecea52b546402c2712a1fc3 -- diff looks correct |
ryanofsky
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code review ACK 36d904246aa574f65ecea52b546402c2712a1fc3. Nice one line code change
d5cfd7a to
19d2f1a
Compare
ryanofsky
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code review ACK 19d2f1ae1091c94cc45bac3b258221785a454f90. Just suggested test changes since last review
19d2f1a to
865051c
Compare
865051c to
a5e7795
Compare
theStack
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ACK a5e7795
|
I expected this to be more expensive, but as it exposes data that is already in the internal data structures anyway, good idea! |
|
Kudos to @ariard and @ryanofsky! |
ryanofsky
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code review ACK a5e7795. Changes since last review getblockhash python test fixes, and removing the last hardcoded height
a5e7795 rpc: Expose block height of wallet transactions (João Barbosa) Pull request description: Closes #17296. ACKs for top commit: practicalswift: ACK a5e7795 -- diff looks correct now (good catch @theStack!) theStack: ACK a5e7795 ryanofsky: Code review ACK a5e7795. Changes since last review getblockhash python test fixes, and removing the last hardcoded height Tree-SHA512: 57dcd0e4e7083f34016bf9cf8ef578fbfde49e882b6cd8623dd1c64716e096e62f6177a4c2ed94f5de304e751fe23fb9d11cf107a86fbf0a3c5f539cd2844916
Github-Pull: bitcoin#17437 Rebased-From: a5e7795
|
Isn't this semi-redundant with "confirmations"? |
Lacking an atomic way to query the current height at the same time, this is slightly less error prone. |
Github-Pull: bitcoin#17437 Rebased-From: a5e7795
83e1d92 test: listsinceblock block height checks (Jon Atack) Pull request description: This is the second commit of #17535. This PR extends a listsinceblock test to check the new transaction 'blockheight' field recently added in #17437. It also cleans up code in the test function without changing or removing existing checks. ACKs for top commit: fjahr: tested ACK 83e1d92 ryanofsky: Code review ACK 83e1d92. Nice test improvements! Tree-SHA512: 92874b49a3bc0236500495f32dfcf683e1971ca3d4c51702c69ed4ce7dfce21273754f02f93d1243d73793701d9fdf49e14b149477cd249cbbd9e4e8d5bd49f8
83e1d92 test: listsinceblock block height checks (Jon Atack) Pull request description: This is the second commit of bitcoin#17535. This PR extends a listsinceblock test to check the new transaction 'blockheight' field recently added in bitcoin#17437. It also cleans up code in the test function without changing or removing existing checks. ACKs for top commit: fjahr: tested ACK 83e1d92 ryanofsky: Code review ACK 83e1d92. Nice test improvements! Tree-SHA512: 92874b49a3bc0236500495f32dfcf683e1971ca3d4c51702c69ed4ce7dfce21273754f02f93d1243d73793701d9fdf49e14b149477cd249cbbd9e4e8d5bd49f8
|
It would be useful if block heights were also included in For anyone stumbling here looking for a workaround, I ended up achieving atomicity for the number of confirmations + current block height by querying for the tip first, then issuing A similar approach could also be used for |
Summary: a5e77959c8ff6a8bffa1621d7ea29ee8603c5a14 rpc: Expose block height of wallet transactions (João Barbosa) Pull request description: Closes #17296. --- Backport of Core [[bitcoin/bitcoin#17437 | PR17437]] Test Plan: ninja all check check-functional Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Subscribers: Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D7712
Summary: > This PR extends a listsinceblock test to check the new transaction 'blockheight' field recently added in [[bitcoin/bitcoin#17437 | PR17437]]. It also cleans up code in the test function without changing or removing existing checks. This is a backport of Core [[bitcoin/bitcoin#18420 | PR18420]] Test Plan: `ninja && test/functional/test_runner.py wallet_listsinceblock` Reviewers: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Reviewed By: #bitcoin_abc, Fabien Subscribers: Fabien Differential Revision: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D8895
Closes #17296.